What a coup! Here they are, America’s sweethearts, that jumped right to the top of the sales charts. In 1976, the Cutlass line was the number one selling car in the United States of Oldsmobile, with almost 650k units sold. And those sales were driven by this formal coupe, available in three versions: plain Supreme, Supreme Brougham, and the Salon coupe. They alone accounted for some 425k in sales. Imagine that: a coupe selling in as many numbers as all of Camry sales.

Yes, the late seventies and early eighties were the glory days of the personal luxury coupe. And yes, this third installment of our Colonnade segment of CCCCC is the last of this bunch; there are three columns on a Colonnade, you know.

Regrettably, I do not have a Salon coupe for your visual edification. The Salon was the sales laggard of this trio, while the CS (brown car) was the big seller. Why? The price/value relationship, of course. At $4670 ($16.6k adjusted), the base Supreme coupe was about the cheapest way to look like you were staying ahead of the game of life, if only just barely so. Therefore, it was also the biggest seller of the bunch. Of course, that base price got you a 105 hp 3.8 L Buick V6 without air conditioning and pretty much any other amenity. Although by the mid seventies, automatics and assisted disc brakes and power steering had become standard equipment. None too soon.

As this picture shows, the Supreme wasn’t all that Supreme. The seventies were known for its inflation, and the name “Supreme” was not left out. Back in 1967, the Cutlass Supreme really was; ten years later, those infamous hard plastic lower door panels have appeared. Looks like more like a Chevelle Malibu. Hopefully, the neighbors are going to be impressed with your CS from a safe distance, and aren’t going to walk over and stick their noses in its window.

If one ponied up the extra $300 bucks or so for the Supreme Brougham, the benefit was mostly in better interior appointments as well as a standard 110 hp 260 CID (4.3 L) Rockette V8. The 260 was one of that genre of utterly emasculated V8s that appeared in the wake of the energy crisis. Never has a V8 felt more like a weak chested six, or a half-way decent four, of those times, that is.

Trying to fathom a 4.3 liter V8 making 110 hp in anything but a seventies context is simply impossible. But two bigger V8s were also available: the 350 (genuine) Olds V8 made 170 hp, and a 403 CID Rocket was also optional, with a mighty 185 hp on tap. The prior year, one could still order the big 455 in a Cutlass, but that motor was now no more.

In case you’re wondering what this CS brougham coupe is up to in its old age, it has become a “jumper”. That’s what the owner told me before he drove, not jumped off. But I think he is serious, given its stripped interior and its high-riding stance. If anyone can clarify the sport of jumping, I’m all ears.

How did I know it started life as a Brougham? The seats, of course. They have that distinctive “loose-pillow” construction that was all the rage for quite a while. This is a pretty early example of that; does anyone know when the loose-pillow first appeared?

It’s obvious that “jumping” is a serious undertaking, given the extensive modifications this Brougham has been subjected to. But that fine upholstery pattern is still intact, able to withstand all the jumping its owner can dish out.

Whatever jumping is, it appears that this participant does it with a higher calling. Perhaps its his way of getting more elevation: Closer to Thee, Lord, let me jump…

I suspect that there’s something a bit warmer than a stock engine under the hood of the Supreme jumper. And I apologize for the sun ruining this shot of its business end. When the sun comes out in the winter around here, everyone is just dazzled, including my camera.

So let’s take a less celestially-affected look at that waterfall grille, which is disturbingly similar to that of the 1975 Imperial. Now that’s a change, GM stealing design ideas from Chrysler. When was the last time that happened?

It’s time to bid the Colonnades adieu. Enough is enough, and I;m not sure I want to see a Cutlass Colonnade for quite a while again. Frankly, the odds of finding one aren’t all that hot anymore. But if I were to find a Salon…or a 442…

55 Comments

Excellent series on one of our favoite designs.
We neglected to note and pay homage to one of the most identifiable characteristics of these Colonades. The Landau tops and Opera Windows! Key players in the great brougham epoch indeed.
I would like to congratulate the individual who came up with those terms, whoever he (or she) may be; spot on in creating a faux luxury sensibility.

Unfortunately, you haven’t been able to find a decent-looking example. These were splendid looking in a mist blue metallic with white vinyl roof and white/blue interior – like the one a buddy of mine bought when he traded in his CJ5 Jeep in spring, 1977. Me? true to form, I would never buy one because of the fixed rear windows, although the last coupe I did buy was our 1981 Reliant, but the windows were fixed on four door models too, except for a puny vent. I just can’t seem to win!

A co-worker at the time bought a 1981 Grand Prix complete with T-tops. That too, was a sweet ride, right down to the prominently-exposed Torx dash screws! The car was later stolen, that’s how popular those models were. The Buick Regal was the prettiest of all, though.

Thanks for a very nice series on these, the last of the GM I grew up with and came to love.

Zackman, that may be true, but such a high proportion of these rigs came in that brown color that I truly think it’s more representative of the car. I also remember that the great majority of them were driven by guys with untrimmed facial hair and wearing dirty t-shirts.

Were they driving these cars when they were brand new? I remember these Cutlasses as being the “respectable” choice for suburban families or young “upwardly mobile” singles who wanted something stylish but not too expensive.

I suspect that the demographic of those sporting a mullet and a wife-beater who were driving all those ratty, mid-seventies’ Cutlass coupes might be attributed to the theory that they had figured out that trailer-park females were more attracted to the ‘class’ of an Oldsmobile than a jacked-up, loud-muffler Camaro.

Not to mention that there was (marginally) more room in the back seat of a Cutlass…

My driver’s ed car was a brand new ’77 Supreme Brougham with every option except T-tops. It was red with that fancy loose pillow upholstery. Talk about learning in style. I do remember one day when we were doing freeway driving the instructor was yelling at me, “Get your speed up!” as we were merging. She shut up when I told her I had the gas pedal on the floor. And this one had the 350.

My girlfriend’s older brother had a black ’76 Salon with the 455, all the options and T-tops. Gawd I loved that car!

Love me some Cutlass Supreme! But hold the V6 and the gawd awful 260. Those two boat anchors made the Rocket 350 of this vintage seem like a real rocket. And what did that pack, maybe 155 horses? Curious—Chevy to the best of my memory did not offer a V6 in their 76-77 Montes, did they? 305’s (feh) and 350s (bit better). So, why would GM offer in their upmarket Oldsmobile smaller and less powerful engines than in a work a day Chevrolet? Odd. Then again, GM in the 70s.

I don’t believe Chevy offered the 231 V6. Though Buick of course did in the Century, Regal, and even the LeSabre.

I have a very clear memory of having a cigarette outside the main doors to my high school witnessing a student with his Dad’s new ’76 V6 Regal “power breaking” (remember that?) and smoking up the area, and being impressed in that it was the V6.

Over at oldcarbrochures.com the 1977 Monte Carlo catalog confirms only a 145hp 305ci 2bbl or 170hp 350ci 4bbl were available and the 350 was standard in California. My Father’s Oldsmobile CS had the 350 Rocket and it actually felt ok for its day, but we did call it the “Gutless”. Mom’s ’72 Buick Skylark 350 could blow it away.

The 350 was rated at 170 HP. Car and Driver road tested a ’77 Salon with that engine and achieved a 0-60 time of 11.9 seconds.

While the bottom feeder Oldsmobiles might only have offered the 231 V6 and 260 V8, the 455 (in ’76) and 403 (in ’77) were optional and I don’t think Chevy offered anything bigger than a 350 in those years.

Ah, yes, the hard plastic door panels! Just like the panels in my parents’ 1981 Cutlass Cruiser wagon. Over the years, they showed the effects of every scratch, every scuff from a kick, every stain that got rubbed into the scratches, until the “GM Patina of Crappiness” developed. That car even had the 260 V8! And the light-tan vinyl upholstery. But it wasn’t all bad; that was the car I was allowed to drive regularly, once I learned to drive in the mid-’80s, and I can’t remember it ever letting me down. Not that it was especially memorable.

I owned a 1976 Cutlass Salon Colonnade Coupe. Light silver blue with dark blue vinyl roof and T-tops ($550 option). It had the 350 4 bbl engine with 2.56 rear axle ratio. I have the sticker for this car and it was $7276 total. A very deluxe car for the time. I drove it for about 5 years and it remained in my family until about 10 years ago.

Interesting, SB…I was going to say ’74 with the Cadillac Fleetwood Talisman, immediately followed by the d’Elegance package for the Fleetwood Broughams and Eldorados and everything from Lincoln, and the Chryco Imperials to the Electras, Rivs, 98s and Toros.

Edit: My dad had a ’78 DeVille with the d’Elegance option consisting of huge velour pillow seats and fake fur carpeting. As a 10 year old kid, what I remember most about them was how grippy they were…they always made my underwear go up my crack when I moved around. Kind of a Cadillac Wedgie.

You are right, it was the ’72. I had to go back and look through my vintage car ad collection. Anyways, the only Cadillacs in the 70’s that could be had with the pillow seats were the ones with the d’Elegance package. The Talisman, while extremely plush, actually used a different design.

It’s funny, but just today I was talking with a co-worker, and I had said that I was grateful for this site because it gives me a place to share my otherwise useless knowledge about cars!

Imperial had pillow cushion seats from ’72 until the end in ’75, then they were continued on the renamed New Yorker Brougham.

Paul’s comment about the grille is a good one; apparently, that waterfall grille design is the main reason Chrysler even fielded an Imperial with the ’74 C-body restyle; they were going to can it, then someone high up saw this design and decided they should try one more go.

These cars were EVERYWHERE in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Now they, along with the other Colonnades, have virtually disappeared. They are a rare sight even at local car shows. Interestingly, I see more 1977-79 Thunderbirds at old car shows. Granted, that generation of Thunderbird was also popular when new (selling over 300,000 copies annually during those years), but these Cutlasses were even more popular.

They disappeared thirty years ago. As Reagan pulled us out of malaise, people couldn’t be rid of them soon enough. Their attempts at emissions controls meant that older compacts were faster, more reliable, and more fuel efficient. Their use of fake ornamentation made them embarrassing to be seen in the second the ’70s ended. Frankly, seeing the sales numbers makes me want to go out and hug a Camry, but that adjusted for inflation price makes me want to go out and kick a bureaucrat instead.

The tan gut-less in your picture is nearly identical to my daily driver in high school. It was the Brougham and a ’76 though (had the bifurcated waterfall grille(s)). For a bit I was wondering if the pictured jumper could have been my old car – I had replaced the stock steering wheel with a nearly identical Grant-GT as shown. The horn used to go off randomly due to incredibly poor design – a minor price to pay for a high school kid with a slick steering wheel. Whup – jumper is a ’77, no dice.

The one I had employed the 350 with a four barrel quadrajet. You mentioned 170 HP, but I seem to recall something more like 195 or maybe 205 HP for the 350. Maybe that value creeped up in my head over the years.

BTW: First post here – I love this site – and your extremely deep knowledge of the subject matter.

oldcarbrochures.com is an excellent place to check out some truly eye-searing exemplars of marketing-to-the-wannabe. Green and brown plaid velour seats in a barf-brown vehicle as long as a Freightliner? Check! Vaseline-lensed through-the-car photos of a far-off couple enjoying a high-end gazebo, he in a garish white suit and she with hair displacing almost as much volume as the car’s wretched 120hp V8? Check! Side-on city shot gloating over what appears to be a compact car with an collapsible motor home trailer on the front? Che-eck!

What a horrible, horrible time that must have been. The cars were, almost universally, pathetic pretension of luxury, emblems of American failure in engineering, monuments to insipid excess. Calling them barges is inappropriate, when you think about it – barges are designed to a purpose and execute it in the most efficient manner possible, without care to image or status. These disastrous vehicles are the utter opposite.

When you let the guys who design romance novel covers do your car brochures, you’ve hit rock bottom, face-planted, and started licking. The forward look may have been insane, but at least it was jubilant. This drek is just depressing.

what comes around goes around….these cars were bad ass back when new…but this was the smog years….all the engines being choked out…to under 200 H.P…..they were highly sought after..in the 80s and 90s…by hold on…dirt trackers….so alot of these cars bit the dirt…and died …..now..fast forward to 2012…..guys like me that were alive when these cars were new….want one back….and boom….the market is picking up on these cars…..olds seems to be the easier one to find….pontiac and buick are more difficult…..but hey…. the 70s are back!!!!..yea baby…yea!!!…..as a side note 8 tracks sell very well on ebay!!!……lol

I drooled over that car – it was beautiful. He also had one of humpback Cutlass’ which I always thought looked awful. I could never reconcile how he had the taste to buy that beautiful Cutlass while at the same time buy the other.

A real nice guy. I thought about asking him many times if he would be interested in selling the car – but it was way out of my price range and he clearly loved that car.

A few months later I settled for 74 Gran Torino – definitely not the same!

This car needed the 350 or 403 for anything resembling performance. The 110 HP 231 and the 110 HP 260 V8 were a joke in this large of a car and were simply offered to increase mileage on paper. I remember getting a ride to school everyday by a friend who got to drive his parents 1977 red and white 442 equipped with the 403 and that sucker moved when it was punched despite only making 185 HP on paper. I suspect that engine was underrated and really put out well over 200 horses and 340 torque.

I thought the Cutlass’s of this era looked better with the quad headlights than the rounded single headlights, I’m not a big fan of the vehicles built in this time period but always had a soft spot for the personal luxury coupes GM built in this time frame, I’m glad to see there are still a good number of these cars left on the road today.

Friend had a medium blue with white top and 350, I believe it was a 76. It had good power for the times. It was his wife’s car. I drove it back from Vegas with him and his brother. The car didn’t like me. As I rolled up the window, the winder handle came apart in my hand. The vinyl top came loose in the front and began to parachute and flap, making a racket as it beat on the roof. My friend told me to keep driving, I thought we should cut the loose piece off. After awhile the car seemed to be vibrating, at first we thought is was the top but it got worse so I pulled over. The left rear tire was coming apart, it was still full of air but the steel belts were coming apart and had beat the shit out of the wheel well and quarter panel. We put on the spare and I told him to drive the rest of the way. When we got to his house his wife freaked out. He calmly told her I was driving it when all this happened. Some friend! The new top and paint job the car got really made it look good after that. About a year later his wife began to talk to me again.

Wow, 17k for such a cool looking car? I can’t see why they call it malaise era. Of course, GM shouldn’t have sold a car like the base Cutlass Supreme, with those plastic door pieces, so cheap and with the Oldsmobile name. Sales today, irrelevance tomorrow.

A cousin bought one of the base model 1976 Supremes. I was appalled at the quality of the vinyl seat covering and the overall interior. My Vega of the same year, for which I opted for the deluxe interior at $100 more, seemed luxurious in comparison. I wondered at the time what his reaction was when he got into my lowly Vega.

Are you maybe thinking of the base model plain jane Cutlass with the trianglar rear windows and fast back roof? Those for sure had vinyl seats. The next step up was Cutlass S. But most Supremes at least had cloth bench, or vinyl buckets.

Anyway, bench seat Supremes were a hit with former Impala and Fury owners, looking for something ‘smaller and sportier’. To ‘Rat Pack’ generation, a Cutlass was a ‘sports car’ compared to hauling kids in a plain Chevy.

The high end Broughams with pillowed seats were mostly bought by swinging singles or empty nesters.

From 1976-79, these were the large Oldsmobile BOF Two Door Coupes which were available during those years. Note that I didn’t include the pre-Downsized 1975-76 Oldsmobile Delta 88 and Ninety Eight Coupes because they were much larger to be included in this category plus the 1977-79 Downsized Models were enough to represent them. The 1975-78 Toronado was however included albeit still larger but it was a Personal Luxury Coupe with FWD and BOF Construction as well.

A good friend of mine from Loveland, CO had a huge Olds fetish & one of these Cutlass Supreme Broughams was in his small fleet of Rocket Division cars. His had the last year 455, being a 1976. I liked these cars, too, but was more in love with the Monte Carlo & Grand Prix of this era. Brad, my friend, told me a tidbit about the 403 that I can’t confirm, but it sounds plausible. He said that engine was designed from the inside-out to be a ”high output” engine, and that its 185 hp rating was purposely misleading to keep the Draconian Feds from daring to catch any automaker from having the unmitigated GALL to offer anything even resembling performance in the lo-po ’70’s. I drove a Grand Prix, 1977 model from Wyoming on a test run, & it had the Olds 403. Wyoming & Colorado were both high-altitude areas, so the Pontiac 400 wasn’t available. I was amazed at how much thrust that heavy car had with the 403, & this was through a single exhaust. Maybe some merit to what Brad said? Perhaps. The stick-it-to-the-Man rebel inside me would like to think so.